You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Male infertility and prostate cancer risk: a nested case–control study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Causes & Control, June 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10552-010-9592-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yasir Ruhayel, Aleksander Giwercman, David Ulmert, Lars Rylander, Anders Bjartell, Jonas Manjer, Göran Berglund, Yvonne L. Giwercman |
| Abstract |
The pathogenesis of prostate cancer is unclear, although experimental evidence implicates androgens as playing an important role. Infertile men frequently suffer from some degree of hypogonadism and may hence be hypothesized to be at lower risk of developing prostate cancer than fertile men. To test this hypothesis, we conducted a case-control study nested within "the Malmö Diet and Cancer Study" cohort in Sweden, inviting 661 prostate cancer cases and 661 age-matched controls to participate. Of the 975 (74%) respondents, we excluded 84 childless men with unknown fertility status. Thus, 891 men were included, providing 445 prostate cancer cases and 446 controls. Of these, 841 (94%) men were biological fathers and 50 (6%) men were infertile. Logistic regression showed that the infertile men were at significantly lower risk of being diagnosed with prostate cancer than the fertile men (odds ratio, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.83). Conditional and unconditional multivariate models, adjusting for socioeconomic, anthropometric, and health-status-related factors, provided similar estimates. We conclude that enduring male infertility is associated with a reduced prostate cancer risk, thus corroborating the theory that normal testicular function, and hence most probably sufficient steroidogenesis, is an important contributing factor to the later development of this malignancy. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 13% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 13 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 34% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 6% |
| Psychology | 3 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 18 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 July 2010.
All research outputs
#16,171,492
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Causes & Control
#1,632
of 2,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,074
of 98,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Causes & Control
#22
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,187 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 98,436 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.